Burning Oil on Freezing Water – (one person’s view of the extreme reactions to the Ice Bucket Challenge)

The Ice Bucket Challenge has led to a massive debate about whether what is being done to raise money is right. From champions of water politics to anti vivisectionists, more and more people are progressively militant with their reactions. So I thought , in the spirit of debate, I’d give my opinion.  And why not. Enough other people are giving their’s, I’ll just disappear into the background.

So people with MND / ASL should just die, with no help at all, is that right? Cancer. AIDS. Malaria. Would you have them stop research on those? More people know more people who have those than MND. Hey, there are more sufferers. But should those with MND have fewer rights to better treatment as a result of the disease they suffer from? You either condemn and stop research outright - which would please a few - but be accused of murder for not doing enough, or you develop the platform for research (you could pay students or those who choose to be tested - actually not a bad idea) away from the current methods, but they are the current methods. You're right, animal cruelty is an abomination. There must be better ways to do it. I don't know the answer.

 I'm not saying that this method of funding a charity is right, or that the charities involved are terribly well organised (because, of course, all other charities are BRILLIANTLY managed, aren’t they?) or that all the work the charities involved do is, as is now so regularly pointed out, ethical or moral, but if you really have met someone with MND and had a relationship with them that goes beyond merely knowing that they've got it, then you'll realise just how horrible it is and to be able to do something worthwhile to alleviate their pain, fear, loneliness, their progressive incapacity and enable them to live with a greater quality of life and die with dignity is a GOOD thing. Having said that, I presume I have now invited damnation and all the anti-vivisection vitriol you see fit to rain down upon me.

In which case I'll just pour oil on the fire and, without lambasting him because what he’s doing is great work, add that MATT DAMON did his challenge in a drought ridden area. So, of course, he will be careful with the water he uses (although taking water from multiple toilets isn’t actually using less water. He might just as well have poured it from the tap since it all comes from the same place!) He is also a champion of Water.org. Another GOOD thing. Although, taking water from the water table in a drought area like many countries in Africa, removes it from water holes and underground lakes that feed many other places, too, adversely affecting another ecosystem, so humanity destroys more in the search for continued existence. Yin and yang do not necessarily balance here, either. The arguments have many sides.  

However, in a country where water is available - and currently in abundance! - why shouldn't we? For example, in Gaza they've been doing the Rubble bucket challenge. In Egypt the Sand bucket challenge (albeit making different points!)  And before anyone really weighs in, the fact that we can even have this debate is because of where we live and the opportunities afforded to us. Not all of which have been built entirely on moral or ethical ground. Despite what some people think, I do not have a soap box to stand on or a high moral ground to mount, but there seems to be a lot of one-sided propaganda.

I’ll close with a response to people saying that this whole exercise is unethical, immoral and offensive.

The fact that we're all in a position to do something worthwhile and debate the efficacy of it is a good thing. I'm sure that most people haven't looked at the facts, or the financing. I'm pretty sure that most people don't do that any of the time, just think of the number of times you click on Ts & Cs without reading them. They just do what they think is right. And they do it, mostly, for the right reasons. And they do it because it makes them feel better.  That doesn’t make people bad.

There are as many sides to an argument as you care to propose and each of us has a right to our opinion whether everyone agrees or not (thank God we don’t, how boring would that be?) So could we stop the vitriolic ranting and the ritual, sanctimonious justifications, please?

Thanks

.

M